Explore Our Website And Find Joy In The History, Numismatics, Art, Mythology, And Geography Of Coins!!!NumisWiki Is An Enormous Unique Resource Including Hundreds Of Books And Thousands Of Articles Online!!!The Column On The Left Includes Our "Best of NumisWiki" MenuIf You Are New To Collecting - Start With Ancient Coin Collecting 101NumisWiki Includes The Encyclopedia of Roman Coins and Historia NummorumIf You Have Written A Numismatic Article - Please Add It To NumisWikiAll Blue Text On The Website Is Linked - Keep Clicking To ENDLESSLY EXPLORE!!!Please Visit Our Shop And Find A Coin You Love Today!!!

The "New Style" tetradrachms were issued by Athens as a semi-autonomous city under Roman rule. The new-style Owls are markedly different from the Owls of Periclean Athens or the "eye in profile" Athenahead of the Fourth Century. They were struck on thinner, broad flans, typical of the Hellenistic period, with a portrait of Athena that reflected the heroic portraiture of the period. The owl now stands on an amphora, surrounded by magistrates' names and symbols, all within an olive wreath. The amphora is marked with a letter that may indicate the month of production. Letters below the amphora may indicate the source of the silver used in production.

Owl standing on Panathenaic amphora; in the field, two monograms, or two or three magistrates' names, and an adjunct symbol; on the amphora, usually, a numeral (Α-Μ, or sometimes Ν) and, as a rule, two or more letters beneath the amphora; the whole in olive-wreath.

No one who compares the thick and irregularly struck coins of the'old style', which survived at least down to the Macedonian conquest (B.C. 322), with the thinner money of the'new style' (cf. BMC Attica, Pls. V and VIII) can fail to see at a glance that a considerable time must have elapsed between the two issues. During this interval, which includes the period of Macedonian supremacy, there were very few autonomous coins struck at Athens (see above, p. 375). Whether any considerable number of regal coins of Macedonian types were minted there, is doubtful. The Τετραχμα Αντιγονεια of Antigonus Gonatas, with the'kalathos' as a distinctive Athenian mint-mark (Babelon, Traité, i. 485), are the only regal coins which can be positively attributed to Athens.1

About B.C. 229 Athens entered into friendly relations with Rome, and shortly afterwards a foedus aequum between the two cities was arranged (Tac. Ann. ii. 53). In these circumstances Athens may, in all likelihood, have been in a position to reorganize her mint, and from the produce of her silver mines to issue from time to time silver tetradrachms equivalent in weight and intrinsic value to those of the successors of Alexander.

When Athens, about this time, began once more to coin money in her own name, she adhered to the types of her old coins, so far as to place the head of Athena on the obverse and the owl on the reverse, but the difference in the mode of treatment of these types was very great.

The head of Athena on the new tetradrachms was certainly suggested by that of the colossal chryselephantine statue by Pheidias in the Parthenon, described by Pausanias (i. 24. 5) as having on each side of the helmet a griffin, and in the midst a sphinx. On the coins the griffin is frequently replaced by a flying Pegasos; the sphinx does not appear, but in its place, the fore-parts of four or more horses, which Pausanias omits to mention, but which must have been a leading feature in the model which the die-engraver had in his mind.

On the reverse other modifications of the old type attract our notice. The intimate connection of the coinage with the Panathenaic Festivals is further emphasized by the addition of the Panathenaic amphora beneath the owl, in place of the waning moon of similar, though less obvious, import; and the little olive-spray in the corner of the incuse square on the older coins is replaced by a completewreath of olive enclosing

1 Specimens of these coins appear among the offerings in the Asklepieion between the years B.C. 261 and 253 (see supra, p. 232).

Across the field of the new coins are the names of the two annual magistrates (at first in monogram form), accompanied by a subsidiary type or adjunct symbol, chosen by the magistrate whose name stands first (Madonald, Coin Types, p. 54). To these two magistrates; names there is added during the greater part of the second century (and rarely after circ. B.C. 100) the name of a third magistrate, which is frequently changed, in some series as many as twelve times, in the course of the period during which the other two principal magistrates hold office. That this period is a year is proved by the numeral letters that are placed on the amphora beneath the owl. It has been conclusively shown (N. C., 1899, p. 288) that these indicate the month of the ordinary or lunar year in which the coins were struck. It is not, however, to be supposed that coins were minted with undeviating regularity year by year, or even month by month, in the years when they were issued. The supply was regulated by the demand. It was only during years of considerable activity that issues bearing all the month numerals Α-Μ (or even Ν in intercalary years, when there were thirteen lunar months) took place.

Various plausible arguments have been adduced in favour of the identification of the two annual magistrates with the occupants of important offices, e.g. the στρατηγος επι τα οπλα (strategos epi ta opla, generals for the Arms) or the στρατηγος επι την παρασκευην (strategos epi ten paraskeyen, generals for the preparation) (Reinach, Rev. dev. Etudes gr., i. 163); but these arguments have been effectively disposed of by Preuner (Rh. Mus., xlix. 396) and Kirchner (Z. f. N., 1898, 74), who have shown that the officers in question were not the chief magistrates of the state, but usually members of influential families, sometimes foreign princes, and very often closely related members of one and the same family, such as father and son, or two brothers. The names of some of these same individuals are also met with previously in more dignified offices, such as the archonship, while on the other hand they must occasionally have been under thirty, the minimum age for the holder of a regular αρχη (arci, government authority) at Athens (Sundwall, Undersuchungen, etc., p. 108).

At Rome the magistrates responsible for the coinage formed a triumvirate (Triumviri Monatales). At Athens they were, for circa. B.C. 229, a duumvirate; but the responsibility of these annual duumviri would seem to have been shared, during the greater part of the second century, but a third official, whose name appears beneath those of his two annually appointed colleagues.

Sundwall, after an exhaustive examination of the available evidence, concludes that the duumviri at Athens were not magistrates in the strict sense of the term; their office was an honorary επιμελεια (epimeleia, magistrate) and carried with it a λειτουργια (leitourgia) (op. cit., p. 108). he has also given good reasons for supposing that there was an intimate association between the Athenian mint and the Areopagus. It seems probable that, on the later coins, one of the two επιμεληται (epimeletai, magistrates) always an ex-archon (op. cit., p. 106). Moreover, this arrangement would appear to have superseded an even stricter system of control, to which the presence of a third official's name bears witness. A scrutiny of the names that actually occur suggests that during the greater part of the second century a committee of twelve Areopagites was annually appointed and specially entrusted with a more direct responsibility for the purity, etc., of the coins, the members of this committee holding office in rotation; whenever a fresh issue of coins was required the signature of the committee-man whose turn it was to take duty was added beneath that of the ordinary επιμελητει (op. cit., p. 69). The signature of this third official has also an important bearing on an interesting problem of Athenian chronology. That there was a close correspondence between it and the numeral letter on the amphora had long been noted; but the frequent differences remained unexplained until MacDonald (N. C., 1899, p. 317) suggested that they were to be connected with the double system of time reckoning, which we know from inscriptions to have been in vogue at Athens during a considerable part of the second century B.C. (G. F. Unger, Die attischen Doppeldata in Hermes, xiv. p. 593). He inferred that, while the amphora letter denoted the lunar month, the period of office of the third magistrate was reckoned κατα θεον, or in terms of the solar year, and that consequently'we have in the coins of the new Style, as now interpreted, the most extensive, though not, of course, the most detailed, series of documents in which the double dates can be recognized'. Sundwall, while confirming this inference, has made it the starting-point for a careful investigation, as the result of which he has been able to determine, by a comparison with the astronomical testimony, the precise dates of several of the series. Incidentally, the numismatic evidence suggests that epigraphists have ante-dated by one year the list of Athenian archons (op. cit., p. 73).

The minute precautions which seem to have been taken to differentiate the issues of silver coins at the Athenian mint are further exemplified by the addition, beneath the amphora, of various initial letters of doubtful import; thought by some to stand for the names of the various officinae of the mint. But they are more probably, as Svoronos has suggested, the names of the various silver mines in Laurium from which the metal was procured. If these initials are to be interpreted in the latter sense, it would appear that some half-dozen mines were in almost constant work, while the rest, about twenty in number, were only occasionally resorted to.

Workmanship neat and careful. In fabric the coins are smaller and thicker than those of the previous classes. (BMC Attica, Pl. XI.)

FIG. 215.

ΑΜΜΩΝΙΟΣ ΚΑΛΛΙΑΣ. Two torches. Cf. Αμμω.—Διο. in Class II, where Ammonios's symbol is the kerchnos, which, like the torches, is an Eleusinian emblem. It is worth mentioning that a later Ammonios, Plutarch's instructor, describes the kerchnos in his book περι βωμων και θυσιων (Athenaeus, xi. 476). This series falls quite early in Class III.

ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΣ ΝΙΚΟΓ. or ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΣ ΚΑΡΑΙΧΟΣ (Fig. 215). Elephant The first magistrate on this series which must have been issued in B.C. 176, is certainly Antiochus IV (Theos, Epiphanes), who was resident in Athens before his accession to the throne of Syria, B.C. 175.

The name of Καραιχος, who succeeded Nikogenes as second magistrate in the third month of the lunar year, recurs as first magistrate on a somewhat later series, Καραιχ.—Εργοκλε.

ΔΙΟΤΙΜΟΣ ΜΑΓΑΣ. No symbol. Distinctly earlier in style than the series Ανδρεας—Χαριναυτης (c. B.C. 150), but not far removed from Χαριναυτης—Αριστεας (c. B.C. 170), with both of which series one of the third magistrates' names, Χαριναυτης, connects it.

ΔΩΡΟΘΕ. ΔΙΟΦ. Forepart of lion. In style this is apparently one of the earliest series in Class III, but Sundwall (p. 100) would place it much later (c. B.C. 112).

ΕΥΡΥΚΛΕΙ. ΑΡΙΑΡΑ. The three Charites. Preuner (Rhein. Mus. N. F., xlix. 371) has identified this Eurykleides as the nephew of the famous statesman Eurykleides of the third century B.C., and Ariara. as Ariarathes V of Cappadocia, who, before his accession, B.C. 162, was resident in Athens and obtained the citizenship. The series is dated by Sundwall (p. 95) in B.C. 169 (cf. BMC Attica, xlii).

ΚΑΡΑΙΧ. ΕΡΓΟΚΛΕ. Prow. The name Καραιχος occurs as second magistrate in the series Αντιοχος—Καραιχος (B.C. 176), and as third magistrate in Πολυχαρμ(ος)—Νικογ(ενης) (c. B.C. 170). Sundwall dates this series B.C. 172.

ΛΥΣΑΝ. ΓΛΑΥΚΟΣ. Cicada. These two magistrates were brothers. See BMC Attica, xliii, and Kirchner (Z. f. N., xii. p. 82). The series is dated by Sundwall (p. 96) B.C. 159.

ΣΩΚΡΑΤΗΣ ΔΙΟΝΥΣΟΔW. Apollo Delios. The archaic statue of the Delian Apollo (Overbeck, Gr. Plastik, i. 78) points to the time when Delos was presented to Athens by the Romans (B.C. 167-166). Sundwall (p. 97) would fix the date of this series as B.C. 162. About this time the Athenians in Delos may have issued the tetradrachms with the inscr. ΑΘΕ Ο ΔΕΜΟΣ in that island, and the bronze coins of the Apollo Delios type (BMC Attica, Pl. XIV. 9); see infra, p. 387.

ΤΙΜΑΡΧΟΥ ΝΙΚΑΓΟ. Anchor and Star. The first name in this series is in the genitive case. In style these coins seem to belong to the earlier years of Class III.

(Sundwall, p. 95). Charinautes, the first magistrate on this series, is probably identical with a third magistrate of the same name in the series Διοτιμος—Μαγας, but distinctly earlier than the second magistrate of the series Ανδρεας—Χαριναυτης.

Class III (β). Circ. B.C. 146-100 (14 series.)

In field. Three magistrates' names and adjunct symbol. Workmanship rougher and more careless than in Class III(a). The helmet of Athena is flatter at the top and more coarsely decorated. The amphora is more elongated and the owl is increasingly rude in execution. In fabric the coins are thick and small. (BMC Attica, Pl. XII. 1-5.)

ΑΝΔΡΕΑΣ ΧΑΡΙΝΑΥΤΗΣ. Demeter with two torches standing before seated figure. Date, c. B.C. 146 (Sundwall, p. 51). The coins of this series are much later in style than those of the series Χαριναυτης—Αριστεας.

ΑΠΕΛΛΙΚWΝ ΓΟΡΓΙΑΣ. Griffin (Fig. 216). Date, c. B.C. 100 (Sundwall, p. 68). The first magistrate is Apellikon, the Philosopher of Teos (hence his symbol, the Griffin), who, some years later, became with Ariston, a partizan of Mithradates. We meet with his name again as first magistrate in the series Απελλικων—Αριστοτελης.

ΔΗΜΕΑΣ ΕΡΜΟΚΛΗΣ. Head-dress of Isis. Date, c. B.C. 110 (Sundwall, p. 62). Some ten years later Demeas was again first magistrate in the series Δημεας—Καλλικρατιδης

ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟΣ ΑΓΑΘΙΠΠΟΣ. Pilei of the Dioskuri. Date, c. B.C. 110-100 (Sundwall, p. 64). The third magistrate's name on coins of this series is almost always abbreviated and sometimes omitted.

ΔΩΣΙΘΕΟΣ ΧΑΡΙΑΣ. Tyche holding scepter and cornucopia. These magistrates were brothers (Kirchner, Z. f. N., xxi. 90). In style this is one of the latest series of Cl. III (β), though Sundwall (p. 58) places it as early as B.C. 120.

ΑΡΙΣΤΙWΝ ΦΙΛWΝ. Pegasos drinking. Date, B.C. 88-87. Aristion is the well-known tyrant of Athens and strong partisan of Mithradates. Hence his choice of the drinking Pegasos, the Mithradatic coin-type, for his symbol (Kirchner, Z. f. N., xxi. p. 88). The third magistrate's name is temporarily revived in this series (Sundwall, p. 104).

ΔΗΜΕΑΣ ΚΑΛΛΙΚΡΑΤΙΔΗΣ. Isis standing. Date, shortly after B.C. 100 (Sundwall, p. 109). The same Demeas was first magistrate some ten years earlier in the series Δημεας—Ερμοκλης, and third magistrate in Αροπος—Μνασαγο(ρας).

ΔΙΟΦΑΝΤΟΣ ΑΙΣΧΙΝΗΣ. Seated Sphinx. Date, early in the first century B.C. (Sundwall, p. 109).

FIG. 217.

ΒΑΣΙΛΕ. ΜΙΘΡΑΔΑΤΗΣ ΑΡΙΣΤΙWΝ. Star between crescents (Fig. 217). This historically important series may be exactly dated B.C. 87-86, and follows that of Αριστιων—Φιλων. It is the only one of which gold staters are known (N. C., 1897, Pl. IV. 9). This gold issue (like that at Ephesus (q.v.)) was occasioned by the military necessities of Mithradates in his war with Rome. It thus appears that gold coins were only issued at Athens on rare occasions and for special war requirements. For the previous issues (B.C. 407 and 339?) the precious metal was probably procured by melting down the gold treasures of the Parthenon. The gold for this issue was doubtless supplied by a subsidy from Mithradates to his agent Aristion.

ΧΕΝΟΚΛΗΣ ΑΡΜΟΧΕΝΟΣ. Roma seated. These three series were probably issued B.C. 91-98, corresponding with the archonship of Medeios, a period of strict oligarchical regime, during which an annual change of magistrates was not compulsory (Sundwall, p. 110).

ΔΙΟΚΛΗΣ ΜΕΛΙ. ΜΗΔΕΙΟΣ. Athena Parthenos. (BMC Attica, Pl. XII. 9.) The first three Diokles series belong, according to Sundwall (p. 115), to c. B.C. 40. The Διοκλης Μελιτευς of the last series is a different man, and may be dated a few years later, c. B.C. 35.

ΔΙΟΝΥCΙΟΣ ΔΗΜΟCΤΡΑΤΟC. Caduceus. Of this series drachms only are known. Sundwall (Z. f. N., xxvi. 273), on account of the late form of the sigma, assigns it to the time of Augustus, and believes it to be the last autonomous Athenian issue of silver coins.

ΚΟΙΝΤΟΣ ΧΑΡΜΟΣΤ[Ρ]Α. Two ears of corn. This Κοιντος is identified by Sundwall (pp. 67 and 114 note) with the archon of that name in B.C. 56-55, and is to be distinguished from the Κοιντος of the Κοιντος—Κλεας series, c. B.C. 105.

ΛΕΥΚΙΟΣ ΑΝΤΙΚΡΑΤΗΣ. Artemis with two torches, and Demeter. Lucius was archon B.C. 59-58. The series belongs to about that time.

ΝΕΣΤWΡ ΜΝΑΣΕΑΣ. Stag. These two series probably belong to two successive years, c. B.C. 80 (Sundwall, p. 113).

ΡΑΝΤΑΚΛΗΣ ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟΣ. Heraklesμυστης holding in r. a little pig by the foot, and in l. the βακχος. (Svoronos, Riv. Ital. di Num., 1908). Sundwall (p. 114) places this series after B.C. 50.

ΣΩΤΑΔΗΡ ΘΕΜΙΣΤΟΚΛΗΣ. Βακχος Date, c. B.C. 50. Themistokles seems to have been the son of Theophrastos; cf. the series Θεοφραστος—Θεμιστοκλης (Sundwall, p. 114).

ΤΡΥΦWΝ ΠΟΛΥΧΑΡ[Μ]ΟΣ. Hekate triformis. Polycharmos was archon shortly after the capture of Athens. Sundwall (p. 113) gives this series to c. B.C. 80.

ΦΙΛΟΚΡΑΤΗΣ ΗΡΩΔΗΣ. Dionysos with kantharos and thyrsos. Herodes was archon B.C. 60-59. The form of the omega indicates that this series is earlier than that of ΜΕΝΝΕΑΣ ΗΡWΔΗΣ (see supra).

ΦΙΛΟΚΡΑΤΗΣ ΚΑΛΛΙΦWΝ. Nike. Kalliphon was archon B.C. 58-57. This and the preceding series may therefore be placed shortly after that date (Sundwall, p. 114).

That the above enumerated 110 series of Athenian silver coins of the'New Style' cover a period of about two centuries, c. B.C. 229 to the time of Augustus, has been proved by Kirchner, Sundwall, and others. The sequence of the various series, as outlined by me in the B. M. C. on stylistic grounds, has been, in the main, amply confirmed by these historical researches, although the duration of the issues has been extended from the conquest of Athens by Sulla down to the time of Augustus. It is important, however, to remark that from the first to last there is a steady and continuous deterioration in style and change in fabric, which seem to leave no place for the inclusion in the list of the three following exceptional issues, which I am therefore inclined to regard as not struck at Athens itself :—

NON-ATHENIAN SERIES.

(i) In field of rev . Symbol. Naked figure to front brandishing a sword (Harmodius (?), N. C., 1902, Pl. XV. 14). This remarkable issue (of which four specimens only are at present known) is characterized by a very barbarous copy of the head of Athena on the obv., while on the other hand the rev. is carefully engraved in the style of the first half of the second century B.C., which is clearly its approximate date of issue. The very rude execution of the obv. die makes it, however, impossible, in my opinion, to assign it to Athens. I would therefore propose to attribute it to the Delian mint, and to regard it as the first issue of the Athenian Kleruchy in that island, when, in B.C. 166, it was presented to Athens by the Romans. From this time the administration of Delos was conducted in the name of ο δημος ο Αθηναιων των εν Δηλω κατοικουντων. It is quite possible that the well-executed rev. die may have been supplied to the first επιμελητης Δηλου on his appointment to that office by the Areopagus (?) (Sundwall, p. 71) from the mint at Athens, and that the obv. die may have been cut by a less skilful workman at Delos itself. It is practically certain that the Athenians opened a mint there when they came into possession of the island, for it is hardly likely that the large numbers of small bronze coins reading which have been found in Delos can all have been imported from Athens (Köhler, Ath. Mitth., vi. 238; Svoronos, Journ. Int., 1900, 51.)

(ii) Head of Athena resembling in style the coins of c. B.C. 150. Rev. Without . Owl on rounded-bellied amphora, on which A, or no numeral; in a field two monograms, and ; no letters beneath (BMC Attica, Pl. XIII. 7, 8). Of this series there are tetradrachms, drachms, and bronze coins. Stylistically there is no place for them either in the monogram series of Class I (B.C. 229-197) or in Sulla's time (c. B.C. 86). Although they are without , the numeral A on the amphora indicates conformity with the Athenian mint regulations. I venture, therefore, to attribute this series also to the mint of the Athenian Kleruchy in Delos, and to date the issue about the middle of the second century B.C.

(iii) Head of Athena resembling in style the coins of c. B.C. 86 of later. Rev. Without . Owl of thick and ungainly form on amphora; no numeral or mint-letters; in field, on either side, a trophy (Z. f. N., xii. 381). The identity of these two trophies with those of Sulla's aureus and denarius struck in B.C. 82 is unmistakable. They are the two trophies erected by the Dictator in commemoration of his two victories over Archelaus, the general of Mithradates, at Chaeronea in B.C. 86 and at Orchomenus in B.C. 85 (Plut. Sul. xix). The absence of and the contrast in style between this tetradrachm and the Athenian issues of about the same date suggest the probability that, like the aureus and the denarius above mentioned, it was struck at some other mint than Athens for Sulla's war requirements, and that the choice of the Athenian types was a purely utilitarian one (of which examples are not wanting in all ages). Possibly these were the coins which Lucullus struck for Sulla during the Mithradatic war. (Plut. Luc. iv.; cf. Plut. Sul. xxv), but there is nothing to indicate the place of mintage.